Cargando…
Role of biomechanical assessment in rotator cuff tear repair: Arthroscopic vs mini-open approach
BACKGROUND: Rotator cuff (RC) tears are one of the most frequent pathologies within the shoulder girdle. Hand dominance and older age are associated with RC tears. Two different surgical procedures, the mini-open (MO) and all-arthroscopic (AA) approach, represented the standard of treatment. AIM: To...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Baishideng Publishing Group Inc
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8696602/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35036341 http://dx.doi.org/10.5312/wjo.v12.i12.991 |
_version_ | 1784619852556664832 |
---|---|
author | Solarino, Giuseppe Bortone, Ilaria Vicenti, Giovanni Bizzoca, Davide Coviello, Michele Maccagnano, Giuseppe Moretti, Biagio D'Angelo, Fabio |
author_facet | Solarino, Giuseppe Bortone, Ilaria Vicenti, Giovanni Bizzoca, Davide Coviello, Michele Maccagnano, Giuseppe Moretti, Biagio D'Angelo, Fabio |
author_sort | Solarino, Giuseppe |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Rotator cuff (RC) tears are one of the most frequent pathologies within the shoulder girdle. Hand dominance and older age are associated with RC tears. Two different surgical procedures, the mini-open (MO) and all-arthroscopic (AA) approach, represented the standard of treatment. AIM: To compare the clinical and biomechanical outcomes of two surgical techniques (AA vs MO procedure) performed to address the painful shoulder syndrome with partial or total supraspinatus tendon tear. METHODS: Eighty-eight participants, 50 following RC repair with AA and 38 with MO approach, were recruited in the present cross-sectional case-control study (ORTHO-SHOULDER, Prot. 0054602). All patients underwent postoperative clinical evaluation for pain (Visual analogic scale), impairment, and disability (disability of the arm, shoulder, and hand) and limitation in daily activity (Constant-Murley score). Patients’ shoulder mobility was also assessed in our Laboratory of Functional Movement through a wearable inertial sensor and surface electromyography to monitor kinematics and muscle activity during the movement on the frontal (abduction/adduction) and sagittal (flexion-extension) planes. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences between the two procedures were observed in either main clinical score or range of motion. A significant increase in velocity during the movement execution and a higher contribution of upper trapezius muscles were found in the AA group compared with MO patients. CONCLUSION: In terms of clinical scores, our findings were in line with previous results. However, the use of technology-based assessment of shoulder mobility has revealed significant differences between the two techniques in terms of mean velocity and pattern of muscle activation. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8696602 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Baishideng Publishing Group Inc |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-86966022022-01-13 Role of biomechanical assessment in rotator cuff tear repair: Arthroscopic vs mini-open approach Solarino, Giuseppe Bortone, Ilaria Vicenti, Giovanni Bizzoca, Davide Coviello, Michele Maccagnano, Giuseppe Moretti, Biagio D'Angelo, Fabio World J Orthop Case Control Study BACKGROUND: Rotator cuff (RC) tears are one of the most frequent pathologies within the shoulder girdle. Hand dominance and older age are associated with RC tears. Two different surgical procedures, the mini-open (MO) and all-arthroscopic (AA) approach, represented the standard of treatment. AIM: To compare the clinical and biomechanical outcomes of two surgical techniques (AA vs MO procedure) performed to address the painful shoulder syndrome with partial or total supraspinatus tendon tear. METHODS: Eighty-eight participants, 50 following RC repair with AA and 38 with MO approach, were recruited in the present cross-sectional case-control study (ORTHO-SHOULDER, Prot. 0054602). All patients underwent postoperative clinical evaluation for pain (Visual analogic scale), impairment, and disability (disability of the arm, shoulder, and hand) and limitation in daily activity (Constant-Murley score). Patients’ shoulder mobility was also assessed in our Laboratory of Functional Movement through a wearable inertial sensor and surface electromyography to monitor kinematics and muscle activity during the movement on the frontal (abduction/adduction) and sagittal (flexion-extension) planes. RESULTS: No statistically significant differences between the two procedures were observed in either main clinical score or range of motion. A significant increase in velocity during the movement execution and a higher contribution of upper trapezius muscles were found in the AA group compared with MO patients. CONCLUSION: In terms of clinical scores, our findings were in line with previous results. However, the use of technology-based assessment of shoulder mobility has revealed significant differences between the two techniques in terms of mean velocity and pattern of muscle activation. Baishideng Publishing Group Inc 2021-12-18 /pmc/articles/PMC8696602/ /pubmed/35036341 http://dx.doi.org/10.5312/wjo.v12.i12.991 Text en ©The Author(s) 2021. Published by Baishideng Publishing Group Inc. All rights reserved. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/This article is an open-access article that was selected by an in-house editor and fully peer-reviewed by external reviewers. It is distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: https://creativecommons.org/Licenses/by-nc/4.0/ |
spellingShingle | Case Control Study Solarino, Giuseppe Bortone, Ilaria Vicenti, Giovanni Bizzoca, Davide Coviello, Michele Maccagnano, Giuseppe Moretti, Biagio D'Angelo, Fabio Role of biomechanical assessment in rotator cuff tear repair: Arthroscopic vs mini-open approach |
title | Role of biomechanical assessment in rotator cuff tear repair: Arthroscopic vs mini-open approach |
title_full | Role of biomechanical assessment in rotator cuff tear repair: Arthroscopic vs mini-open approach |
title_fullStr | Role of biomechanical assessment in rotator cuff tear repair: Arthroscopic vs mini-open approach |
title_full_unstemmed | Role of biomechanical assessment in rotator cuff tear repair: Arthroscopic vs mini-open approach |
title_short | Role of biomechanical assessment in rotator cuff tear repair: Arthroscopic vs mini-open approach |
title_sort | role of biomechanical assessment in rotator cuff tear repair: arthroscopic vs mini-open approach |
topic | Case Control Study |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8696602/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35036341 http://dx.doi.org/10.5312/wjo.v12.i12.991 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT solarinogiuseppe roleofbiomechanicalassessmentinrotatorcufftearrepairarthroscopicvsminiopenapproach AT bortoneilaria roleofbiomechanicalassessmentinrotatorcufftearrepairarthroscopicvsminiopenapproach AT vicentigiovanni roleofbiomechanicalassessmentinrotatorcufftearrepairarthroscopicvsminiopenapproach AT bizzocadavide roleofbiomechanicalassessmentinrotatorcufftearrepairarthroscopicvsminiopenapproach AT coviellomichele roleofbiomechanicalassessmentinrotatorcufftearrepairarthroscopicvsminiopenapproach AT maccagnanogiuseppe roleofbiomechanicalassessmentinrotatorcufftearrepairarthroscopicvsminiopenapproach AT morettibiagio roleofbiomechanicalassessmentinrotatorcufftearrepairarthroscopicvsminiopenapproach AT dangelofabio roleofbiomechanicalassessmentinrotatorcufftearrepairarthroscopicvsminiopenapproach |